Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

An Integrated TAM/ISS Model Based PLS-SEM Approach for Evaluating the Continuous Usage of Voice Enabled IoT Systems

  • Published:
Wireless Personal Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Voice Assistant (VA) market is emerging rapidly. Considering the unique features of voice technology, primarily with respect to its ability to provide a total hands-free way of communication, existing technology acceptance models might not be comprehensive enough to explain the users’ attitudes towards using this technology. Moreover, extant research on VAs are fragmented, with two separate directions. The first one takes a technology acceptance based approach, whereas the second one takes a user satisfaction based approach for explaining the usage of the VAs. In this work a comprehensive model is proposed by integrating the two separate research directions together incorporating the concepts from Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Wixom & Todd Information System Success Model (W&T ISS). Data is gathered using an online survey from 419 people, and the results are analyzed using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling. Results show a statistically significant positive association between the object-based beliefs and attitudes (Information Quality, System Quality, Service Quality) with the behavioral-based beliefs and attitudes (Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Enjoyment). Among the two other contextual factors the effect of privacy risk is found to be non-significant, whereas that of perceived compatibility is significant. Overall, the proposed research model has a good fit (\({R}^{2}=64.6\%\)). Based upon the results, appropriate theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Li, J., Deng, L., Gong, Y., & Haeb-Umbach, R. (2014). An overview of noise-robust automatic speech recognition. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 22(4), 745–777.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brill, T. M., Munoz, L., & Miller, R. J. (2019). Siri, Alexa, and other digital assistants: A study of customer satisfaction with artificial intelligence applications. Journal of Marketing Management, 35(15–16), 1401–1436.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Statista. (2020). Number of Digital Voice Assistants in Use Worldwide from 2019 to 2023 (in billions) (Online). https://www.statista.com/statistics/973815/worldwide-digital-voice-assistant-in-use/, Accessed on March 2, 2020.

  4. Pal, D., Arpnikanondt, C., Funilkul, S., & Razzaque, M. A. (2020). Analyzing the adoption and diffusion of voice-enabled smart-home systems: empirical evidence from Thailand. Universal Access in the Information Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00754-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ewers, K., Baier, D., & Hohn, N. (2020). Siri, Do I Like You? Digital voice assistants and their acceptance by consumers. SMR Journal of Service Management Research, 4(1), 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Moriuchi, E. (2019). Okay, google!: An empirical study on voice assistants on consumer engagement and loyalty. Psychology & Marketing, 36(5), 489–501.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pal, D., Arpnikanondt, C., Funilkul, S., & Chutimaskul, W. (2020). The adoption analysis of voice-based smart IoT products. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 7(11), 10852–10867.

    Google Scholar 

  8. McLean, G., & Frimpong, K. O. (2019). Hey Alexa …examine the variables influencing the use of artificial intelligent in-home voice assistants. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 28–37.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Jia, Q., Guo, Y., & Barnes, S. J. (2017). Enterprise 2.0 post adoption: Extending the information system continuance model based on the technology-organization-environment framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hamidi, H., & Safareeyeh, M. (2019). A model to analyze the effect of mobile banking adoption on customer interaction and satisfaction: A case study of m-banking in Iran. Telematics and Informatics, 38, 166–181.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Soliman, W., & Kahila, T. R. (2020). Toward a refined conceptualization of IS discontinuance: reflection on the past and a way forward. Information & Management, 57(2), 103167.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information Systems Research, 16(1), 85–102.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Zwakman, D. S., Pal, D., Triyason, T., & Vanijja, V. (2020). Usability of voice-based intelligent personal assistants. International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC), 1, 652–657. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTC49870.2020.9289550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bogers, T., et.al. (2019). A Study of Usage and Usability of Intelligent Personal Assistants in Denmark. In Proceedings of international conference on information in contemporary society (iConference 19) (pp. 79–90). Washington, USA, 2019.

  15. Maguire, M. (2019). Development of a heuristic evaluation tool for voice user interfaces. In Proceedings of International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCII’19) (pp. 212–225). Orlando, USA, 2019.

  16. Pal, D., Arpnikanondt, C., Funilkul, S., & Varadarajan, V. (2019). User experience with smart voice assistants: The accent perspective. In Proceedings of 2019 10th international conference on computing, communication and networking technologies (ICCCNT) (pp. 1–6), Kanpur, India, 2019.

  17. Sears, A., Feng, J., Oscitutu, K., & Karat, C. M. (2003). Hands-free, speech-based navigation during dictation: difficulties, consequences, and solutions. Human-Computer Interaction, 18(3), 229–257.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Deng, L., & Huang, X. (2004). Challenges in adopting speech recognition. Communications of the ACM, 47(1), 69–75.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Purwins, H., Li, B., Virtanen, T., Schlüter, J., Chang, S., & Sainath, T. (2019). Deep learning for audio signal processing. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 13(2), 206–219.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Alepis, E., & Patsakis, C. (2017). Monkey says, monkey does: Security and privacy on voice assistants. IEEE Access, 5, 17841–17851.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Yan, C., Zhang, G., Ji, X., Zhang, T., Zhang, T., & Xu, W. (2019). The Feasibility of Injecting Inaudible Voice Commands to Voice Assistants. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing. https://doi.org/10.1109/TDSC.2019.2906165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang, R., Chen, X., Wen, S., Zheng, X., & Ding, Y. (2019). Using AI to attack VA: A stealthy spyware against voice assistances in smart phones. IEEE Access, 7, 153542–153554.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vaidya, T., & Sherr, M. (2019). You Talk Too Much: Limiting Privacy Exposure Via Voice Input. In Proceedings 2019 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW) (pp. 84–91), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2019.

  24. Park, K., Kwak, C., Lee, J., & Ahn, J.-H. (2018). The effect of platform characteristics on the adoption of smart speakers: Empirical evidence in South Korea. Telematics and Informatics, 35, 2118–2132.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Han, S., & Yang, H. (2018). Understanding adoption of intelligent personal assistants: A parasocial relationship perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 118(3), 618–636.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1), 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  29. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 1–95.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Seddon, P. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240–253.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thong, J. Y. L., Yap, C. S., & Raman, K. S. (1993). User Satisfaction as a measure of information system effectiveness. Systems Science, 1, 487–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2862-3_86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1969). The prediction of behavioral intentions in a choice situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(4), 400–416.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14, 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pal, D., Funilkul, S., Vanijja, V., & Papasratorn, B. (2018). Analyzing the elderly users’ adoption of smart-home services. IEEE Access, 6, 51238–51252.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Dutot, V., Bhatiasevi, V., & Bellallahom, N. (2019). Applying the technology acceptance model in a three-countries study of smartwatch adoption. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 30(1), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40(3), 191–204.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440–465.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Xu, J., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). Integrating service quality with system and information quality: An empirical test in the E-service context. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 777–794.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Koivumäki, T., Ristola, A., & Kesti, M. (2008). The effects of information quality of mobile information services on user satisfaction and service acceptance- empirical evidence from Finland. Behavior & Information Technology, 27(5), 375–385.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Crampton, S. M. (2000). A note on SERVQUAL reliability and validity in information system service quality measurement. Decision Sciences, 31(3), 725–744.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kettinger, W. J., & Lee, C. C. (1999). Replication of measures of information systems research: The case of IS SERVQUAL. Decision Sciences, 30(3), 893–899.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Chatterjee, S., Kar, A. K., & Gupta, M. P. (2018). Success of IoT in smart cities of India: An empirical analysis. Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), 349–361.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ammari, T., Kaye, J., Tsai, J., & Bentley, F. (2019). Music, search, and IoT: How people (really) use voice assistants. ACM Transaction on Computer-Human Interaction, 26(3), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mahmood, M. A. (1987). Systems development methods—A comparative investigation. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 293–311.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Chevalier, A., Dommes, A., & Marquie, J. C. (2015). Strategy and accuracy during information search on the web: Effects of age and complexity of the search questions. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 305–315.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Yang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (2015). Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(4), 5–33.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hassan, S., & Li, F. (2005). Evaluating the usability and content usefulness of websites: A benchmarking approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 3(2), 46–67.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Wei, Z., & Landay, J. A. (2018). Evaluating speech-based smart devices using new usability heuristics. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 17(2), 84–96.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mohammadi, H. (2015). Investigating users’ perspectives on e-learning: An integration of TAM and IS success model. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 359–374.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Holsapple, C. W., & Post, A. L. (2006). Defining, assessing, and promoting E-learning success: An information systems perspective. Journal of Innovative Education, 4(1), 67–85.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Petter, S., & McLean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level. Information & Management, 46(3), 159–166.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Liu, C., & Arnett, K. P. (2000). Exploring the factors associated with web success in the context of electronic commerce. Information & Management, 38(1), 23–33.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Bettman, J. R., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1990). A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 45(1), 111–139.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wang, W. T., & Wang, C. C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers & Education, 53, 761–774.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Collier, J., & Bienstock, C. (2006). Measuring service quality in E-retailing. Journal of Service Research, 8(3), 260–275.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Van Dyke, T. P., Prybutok, V. R., & Kappelman, L. A. (1999). Cautions on the use of the SERVQUAL measure to assess the quality of information systems services. Decision Sciences, 30(3), 877–891.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Nysveen, H., Pedersen, P. E., & Thorbjornsen, H. (2005). Intentions to use mobile services: Antecedents and cross-service comparisons. Journal of Academy Marketing Science, 33(3), 330–346.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36, 157–178.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hoy, M. B. (2018). Alexa, Siri, Cortana, and More: An introduction to voice assistants. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 37(1), 81–88.

    Google Scholar 

  62. McLean, G., Al-Nabhani, K., & Wilson, A. (2018). Developing a Mobile Applications Customer Experience Model (MACE)—Implications for retailers. Journal of Business Research, 85, 325–336.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Wu, J. H., Wang, S. C., & Tsai, H. H. (2010). Falling in love with online games: The uses and gratifications perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1862–1871.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pal, D., Funilkul, S., & Vanijja, V. (2018). The future of smartwatches: Assessing the end-users’ continuous usage using an extended expectation-confirmation model. Universal Access in the Information Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0639-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Martin, J., Mortimer, G., & Andrews, L. (2015). Re-examining online customer experience to include purchase frequency and perceived risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 25, 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Van der Heijden, H. (2003). Factors influencing the usage of websites: The case of a generic portal in The Netherlands. Information & Management, 40(6), 541–549.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Zhang, S., Zhao, J., & Tan, W. (2008). Extending TAM for online learning systems: An intrinsic motivation perspective. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(3), 312–317.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Ali, R. A., Rafie, M., & Arshad, M. (2016). Perspectives of students’ behavior towards mobile learning (M-learning) in Egypt: An extension of the UTAUT model. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 6(4), 1108–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusion of Innovations (3rd ed.). New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Dehghani, M. (2018). Exploring the motivational factors on continuous usage intention of smartwatches among actual users. Behavior & Information Technology, 37(2), 145–158.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Nikou, S. (2019). Factors driving the adoption of smart home technology: An empirical assessment. Telematics and Informatics, 45, 101283.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Wang, Y. M., Wang, Y. S., & Yang, Y. F. (2010). Understanding the determinants of RFID adoption in the manufacturing industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(5), 803–815.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H., & Choi, M. (2016). User acceptance of wearable devices: An extended perspective of perceived value. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 256–269.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Bhattacharjee, A., & Lin, C. P. (2015). A unified model of it continuance: Three complementary perspectives and crossover effects. European Journal of Information Systems, 24, 364–373.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Eriksson, K., & Nilsson, D. (2007). Determinants of the continued use of self-service technology: The case of internet banking. Technovation, 27(4), 159–167.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Bhattacharjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Tsai, H. T., Huang, H. C., Jaw, Y. L., & Chen, W. K. (2006). Why online customers remain with a particular e-retailer: An integrative model and empirical evidence. Psychology & Marketing, 23(5), 447–464.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Park, E., Kim, S., Kim, Y., & Kwon, S. J. (2018). Smart home services as the next mainstream of the ICT industry: Determinants of the adoption of smart home services. Universal Access in the Information Society, 17(1), 175–190.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Ahn, T., Ryu, S., & Han, I. (2007). The impact of web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing. Information & Management, 44(3), 263–275.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: CA, Sage Publications.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modelling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–207.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall International Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., & Muller, K. E. (2007). Applied regression analysis and other multivariate methods (4th ed.). Boston: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Pal, D., & Triyason, T. (2018). User intention towards a music streaming service: A Thailand case study. KnE Social Sciences, 3(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Tefertiller, A. (2018). Media substitution in cable-cord cutting: The adoption of web-streaming television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62(3), 390–407.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Adapa, A., Nah, F. F. H., Hall, R. H., Siau, K., & Smith, S. N. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption of smart wearable devices. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(5), 399–409.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Choi, J., & Kim, S. (2016). Is the smartwatch an it product or a fashion product? A study on factors affecting the intention to use smartwatches. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 777–786.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research is funded by the KMUTT New Researcher Funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of IT, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, 10140, Thailand

    Debajyoti Pal & Chonlameth Arpnikanondt

Authors
  1. Debajyoti Pal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chonlameth Arpnikanondt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Debajyoti Pal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This experiment has been approved by the Ethics Committee (IRB) of “King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi”. Further, the data collected from the survey is anonymous.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pal, D., Arpnikanondt, C. An Integrated TAM/ISS Model Based PLS-SEM Approach for Evaluating the Continuous Usage of Voice Enabled IoT Systems. Wireless Pers Commun 119, 1065–1092 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-08251-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-08251-3

Keywords